On 7-nov-04, at 22:18, Tony Hain wrote:
That said, I stand by the point that if the recent depletion rate of 9
/8s
in 6 months holds, there are only 58 months left. That event may have
been
an anomaly, or it may be the precursor to an even more accelerated run
rate.
We won't know for several
Brian,
This expectation is exactly what is inappropriate if IETF wants to attract
pointed experts in a subject to contribute to a specific activity. Often they
can't afford or justify to attend a week of other unrelated (even if
interesting) discussions. Numbers have privately confirmed that
On 6-nov-04, at 4:46, Joe Abley wrote:
Also remember that in IPv6 only /32 are announced, so you can't just
compare
it one to one.
Apologies for the injection of operational content,
You've been on NANOG too long. :-)
but if anybody here is only accepting /32s on their v6 borders, their
import
On Mon, Nov 08, 2004 at 11:24:16AM +0100,
Iljitsch van Beijnum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
a message of 39 lines which said:
What's broken is that they believe the IANA and RIRs when they say:
The IANA may say so but not all the RIRs do:
http://www.arin.net/policy/index.html#six10
There are
So I think my orginal messages (that IPv6 exists because of a
previous
round
of concern about IPv4 address exhaustion, which was used by the
proponents
of
yet another protocol that was going to replace IPv4 to push for
their
protocol's adoption) was right on target.
That is not quite what
if you like beer check out:
http://www.thebrickskeller.com/
its a few blocks from the hotel, they hold the guinness world
record for most varieties of beer commercially available.
the food isnt bad either.
-b
On Sun, Nov 07, 2004 at 02:32:26PM -0500, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
If you like
On 8-nov-04, at 13:28, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
What's broken is that they believe the IANA and RIRs when they say:
The IANA may say so but not all the RIRs do:
http://www.arin.net/policy/index.html#six10
You mean:
6.10. Micro-allocation
ARIN will make micro-allocations to critical
Hi,
On Fri, Nov 05, 2004 at 04:31:46PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So 40% isn't even *allocated* yet (saying that we're probably burning /8's
faster than needed, but only 36% of the available space is actually routed.
Sounds to me like we've got more time than 52 months, if we start
how come there's no IPv6 on the IETF61 network? i'm happy to help
it get installed, so contact me if you need any help noc people
itojun
___
Ietf mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Hello
I was going through the topic SIP for deaf and speech impaired.
My doubt is when a deaf person types the text it will be converted into voice
and sent to other person. but in whose voice will it be sent. If it is sent in
an automated voice then it would be the same for many people who
... at least in Washington on the IETF61 WLAN :(
So Noel is right...
tim
___
Ietf mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
6.4.3. Minimum Allocation
RIRs will apply a minimum size for IPv6 allocations, to facilitate
prefix-based filtering.
The minimum allocation size for IPv6 address space is /32.
So the problem is still there. (Same text is also still present at
IANA and the other RIRs.)
the problem is that
On Mon, Nov 08, 2004 at 01:57:01PM +0100,
Iljitsch van Beijnum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
a message of 49 lines which said:
You mean:
6.10. Micro-allocation
Yes, the one used by Verisign's a.gtld-servers.net and
b.gtld-servers.net (see ARIN's whois).
The fact that the information
On Mon, Nov 08, 2004 at 01:41:00AM +0900,
Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
a message of 9 lines which said:
how come there's no IPv6 on the IETF61 network?
Apparently, there is:
~ % ifconfig eth0
eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:10:B5:49:F8:22
On Nov 8, 2004, at 05:26, Stephane Maes wrote:
Eventually, I have noted and be told in several private notes that
indeed this expectation of participation to the whole meeting has been
questioned repeatedly and never addressed.
It has been discussed several times in the IESG and IAB (and
I'm registered for the Tuesday night social, but now have an informal
meeting conflict - I don't know if the social is sold out or not, but
if you'd like my ticket, please e-mail privately.
Thanks,
Spencer
___
Ietf mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I've seen it this morning, but is coming and going.
Also the routing to Europe is terrible, via AP and 3fff networks, really bad
:-(
Regards,
Jordi
De: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Responder a: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fecha: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 01:41:00 +0900
Para: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I saw this:
Ordenador-de-Jordi-Palet:~ jordi$ traceroute6 www.6power.org
traceroute6 to www.6power.org (2001:800:40:2a03::3) from
2001:468:c12:128:20d:93ff:feeb:73, 30 hops max, 12 byte packets
1 2001:468:c12:128::4 5.709 ms 9.239 ms 7.733 ms
2 2001:468:c12:1::1 25.958 ms 7.548 ms 8.666
Hmmm, looks like bits of the IETF61 WLAN don't have it though...
tjc$ ifconfig en1
en1: flags=8863UP,BROADCAST,SMART,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500
inet6 fe80::20a:95ff:fef4:c482 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x5
inet 130.129.134.203 netmask 0xf800 broadcast 130.129.135.255
Well, I'm now seeing someone's 6to4 offering, which is (unsurprisingly)
taking me nowhere...
I guess I just need to use our tunnel broker, but native would be nicer.
Tim
On Mon, Nov 08, 2004 at 09:11:44AM -0500, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
I saw this:
Ordenador-de-Jordi-Palet:~ jordi$
[off-ietf-topic]
On Mon, 2004-11-08 at 09:11 -0500, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
I saw this:
Ordenador-de-Jordi-Palet:~ jordi$ traceroute6 www.6power.org
traceroute6 to www.6power.org (2001:800:40:2a03::3) from
2001:468:c12:128:20d:93ff:feeb:73, 30 hops max, 12 byte packets
1
Folks,
The IETF 61 multicast and unicast efforts are enumerated here:
http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/ietf61.html
Also, if you are attending the IETF, the IETF-TV bof, is scheduled for
Monday, November 8 at 1300-1500 in the Georgetown room, if you want to
provide input on the future
No sign of v6 in International East, either.
On Nov 08, 2004, at 09:24, Tim Chown wrote:
tcpdump is showing router solicitations going out, but no replies.
i am in munroe west.
Mark/
--
Electronics and Computer Science
a school of the University of Southampton, UK
Stephane Maes wrote:
Brian,
This expectation is exactly what is inappropriate if IETF wants to
attract pointed experts in a subject to contribute to a specific
activity.
OK, so the original complaint seems to have been that the IETF was
violating its process or otherwise doing something
Hi all,
I couldn't find from the terminal room web page info on the 802.1x or WPA
settings for the WLAN network. Anyone have details on the settings needed?
thanks,
John
___
Ietf mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
So we bounce around Abilene for a while:
1 2001:468:c12:128::4 5.709 ms 9.239 ms 7.733 ms
2 2001:468:c12:1::1 25.958 ms 7.548 ms 8.666 ms
3 2001:468:ff:185c::1 9.291 ms 6.951 ms 5.917 ms
4 atlang-washng.abilene.abilene.ucaid.edu 24.813 ms
30.656 ms 22.389 ms
5
From: Christian Huitema [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This is a silly thing to be wasting time on (it's water long under the
bridge now - I was just struck by the power of the irony, and mentioned
it simply because of that), but:
IPv6 exists because of a previous round of concern about IPv4
It looks like I have a taker for this ticket - thanks - and the nice
people at Alcatel said they have sold out, just FYI...
Spencer
- Original Message -
From: Spencer Dawkins [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: IETF General Discussion Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 08, 2004
Stephane,
having investigated the matter a little bit
This scheduling was final rather late. This is unfortunate, and it's on the
list of things that we hope we can improve for later IETFs. You're not the
only one having trouble because of this.
But..
- The WG chair did not announce to
I'd like to suggest that this thread move to the internet-history
list.
(For those unfamiliar with this list, information is available at
http://www.postel.org/internet-history.htm)
--aaron
___
Ietf mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Just a quick thank-you to Alcatel for providing t-shirts that are
long-sleeved, heavier-weight than usual, and (my personal favorite)
non-pure white - you have doubled the number of long-sleeved IETF
t-shirts in my closet, and I'm still wearing the IETF 55 shirt every
chance I get ...
Spencer
On 11/6/2004 3:53 AM, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
In IPv6, I see our job as standardizers to make sure the thing we have
defined is well-defined enough to let it work, and then get the hell
out of the way.
Pardon me for saying so, but I think that represents the canonical problem
with v6
Harald,
Thanks for taking the time to look at this.
Hopefully this can be better handled in the future. I would encourage
formalizing better some deadlines for the agenda and finalizing it in terms of
the slots.
Thanks
Stephane
_
Stephane H. Maes, PhD,
Director of Architecture - Mobile,
802.1X Instructions
IETF 61 Washington Hilton
To use 802.1X:
1. Associate to SSID: IETF61dot1X
2. Use PEAP/MSCHAPv2, TTLS/PAP, TTLS/CHAP, TLS
3. Do Not Verify Server Cert and we wont verify yours :)
4. UserName and/or Realm can be anything, as well as outer tunnel identity
On Nov 8, 2004, at 11:24, Spencer Dawkins wrote:
Just a quick thank-you to Alcatel for providing t-shirts that are
long-sleeved, heavier-weight than usual, and (my personal favorite)
non-pure white
I second that. These do seem quite nice.
(though, for future sponsors: pockets are nice too. :-)
It seems to me that the problem is not if is or not deployed, but who is
actually doing it !
And trying to be positive, I will strongly suggest that the next IETF we
have a new type of training: How to deploy IPv6 in your network.
But for now, it will be *really* nice to have a reply from
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2004-11-08, at 14.28, Bill Manning wrote:
That's inconsistent with the published policy.
No. See above.
When there is an inconsistency, you can't fix it by adding more data.
You need to remove/change something. The fact that the
Folks,
NomCom members will be available in the Bancroft Room at the
Hilton Monday through Wednesday afternoon and available for
nominations, discussion and collection of any feedback you might
like to provide.
Please drop an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (or me directly) if
you'd like to chat with
Hi, all,
The following is information on the BTNS BOF. In the spirit of
addressing the name of this work (originally called ANONsec), and in the
spirit of fun BOF names, it is as follows. The WG itself may have a
different name (or not ;-)
Comments appreciated, esp. constructive ones.
Joe
Yesterday two IETF attendants while taking in the sights of Washington,
at Hains Point, responded to a distress call and pulled a woman from
the Potomac river.
Congratulations to Roy Arends and Jakob Schlyter for their civic spirit.
Olafur
___
What I'm afraid of is that we may end up in a situation where many
people have all the addresses they need and don't see any reason to
adopt IPv6, while others who are late to the table can't get
sufficient IPv4 address space and will have to adopt IPv6 out of
necessity, resulting in a
___
Ietf mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 13:23:30 EST, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ said:
And trying to be positive, I will strongly suggest that the next IETF we
have a new type of training: How to deploy IPv6 in your network.
This seems more appropriate for a NANOG tutorial, or many other places/times,
than an IETF
If you feel like a seeing an art museum but don't want to go to one
of the bigger, better-known museums in DC, consider the Phillips
Collection, which happens to be about four blocks from the Hilton.
They have a fairly nice permanent collection of modern American art,
and the current special
On 8-nov-04, at 19:31, Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote:
Well, the RIRs will actually hand out address-space explicitly saying
they make no guarantees for routability. If you apply for IPv4 PI space
and can only justify the equivalence of a /26 you will get a /26.
There is a difference between
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2004-11-08, at 22.22, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
On 8-nov-04, at 19:31, Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote:
Well, the RIRs will actually hand out address-space explicitly saying
they make no guarantees for routability. If you apply for IPv4 PI
On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 08:39:44 EST, Stephane Bortzmeyer said:
No, in one location :-)
http://www.space.net/~gert/RIPE/ipv6-filters.html
Yes, but didn't you see the Beware of Leopard sign on the
way down the stairs? ;)
pgp48g7cHZcQv.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2004-11-08, at 21.55, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
Hi Harald, Marcia,
I'm not sure what is the problem, but as you probably know, we still
don't
have IPv6 in the IETF61 network, which is really bad.
The worst thing is not getting anyone
I also have a ticket for the Tuesday night social and won't be able to
make it. If you'd like the ticket, please email me privately.
Thanks,
Volker
___
Ietf mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Hi Kurtis,
We don't disagree ;-)
I don't say that IPv4 should not work (actually is working for me pretty
fine, same room as you !), but it a MUST to have both (IPv4 and IPv6)
working at the same time from day -1 of every IETF meeting.
Regards,
Jordi
De: Kurt Erik Lindqvist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
IETF,
First, the executive summary:
v6 is, in fact, flowing across the wired of the IETF61 network.
v6 is not, in fact, flowing across the wireless of the IETF61
network.
v6 is spoken on wired ports in the terminal room thanks to a
generous
I am pleased to announce that the IAB has confirmed the NomCom's
selection of Sam Hartman for a one-year term as Security Area Director,
filling the mid-term vacancy left by Steve Bellovin's resignation.
I would like to thank everyone who volunteered their time and energy
for this process,
Folks,
NomCom members will be available in the Bancroft Room at the
Hilton Monday through Wednesday afternoon and available for
nominations, discussion and collection of any feedback you might
like to provide.
Please drop an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (or me directly) if
you'd like to chat with
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.
RFC 3956
Title: Embedding the Rendezvous Point (RP) Address
in an IPv6 Multicast Address
Author(s): P. Savola, B. Haberman
Status: Standards Track
Date:
SIPPING scheduled for Tuesday, November 9 at 0900-1130 has been changed to
International Ballroom East.
___
IETF-Announce mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
55 matches
Mail list logo
